The long awaited recommendations from the NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Rules Committee were released today and you can see the NCAA release here. We, of course, have opinions on the new recommendations.  Keep in mind that at this point the committee recommendations are simply recommendations.  All rules proposals must be approved by the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which will discuss the men’s lacrosse rules proposals on September 10th. Recommendation 1 – Make the shot clock visible. We have concerns about the entire shot clock experiment but we hated what they did last year and are glad to see that they recommended some modifications.  During the 2014 season when a referee felt that the offensive team was stalling he would give a stall warning which would begin a :30 second countdown.  The problem was that the ref was the only one who knew how much time was left.  He would use his :20 second timer for the first :20 seconds and then give a verbal countdown for the final :10.  For the television audience, this was meaningless. Now the :30 second clock will be visible “in facilities capable of displaying the clocks” in 2015 and then all schools regardless of current ability or budgets will be rolled in by 2017. So at least the casual fan watching on TV will have a decent chance of figuring out what the heck is going on. My problem with the shot clock concept is that it doesn’t necessarily mean more offense or faster play.  Watching a team pass the ball around against a zone defense until they run out of time and then take an outside shot isn’t really all that exciting.  I think if the defense wants the ball back they should go get it.  Press out, shut off the adjacent, and make the offense commit.  I submit that the zone defense is the problem with the pace of play, not the offense.  How many attackmen have you met that don’t want to shoot the ball?  With the shot clock acting as the 8th defender a defense just needs to “hang in there” until the time is up.  This gives them even less incentive to apply more pressure to the ball.  Surprisingly, the committee agrees and even said so which is why they didn’t recommend the use of the shot clock on every possession. You can read those points here. But they still recommend the shot clock after the stall warning. I think the ref’s have enough influence on the game already.  We don’t need them directing the pace of play and the referees I’ve spoken to don’t want the job either.  The current idea begs for inconsistency.  It’s impossible to expect each referee to call the stall warning the same. Brian Coughlin has a great piece at InsideLacrosse.com about the disparity in the stall warning complete with charts and graphs.  Coughlin: 2014 Pace Drop, Stall Warning Disparity in Focus as Rules Committee Convenes. It’s worth a read.  According to Coughlin’s article the top ten offensive teams averaged less than one stall warning per game last season with the bottom teams averaging less than .45 per game.  For something that happens less than once per game it seems like a lot of discussion, training, and expense.  It’s hard to believe it’s solving the perceived problem.  Add that to the fact that last season, the first for the stall warning/shot clock, was the slowest pace of play since 2009.  (According to Coughlin’s article.  You should read it.)  Further evidence that this is not the solution. Recommendation 2 – Alter the Face Off  by calling a violation if a player picks up or carries the ball on the back of his stick. This would not effect a “pinch and pop” as long as the ball is popped up and out of the back of the stick immediately.  But it would make it against the rules to carry the ball down the field in the back of the stick.  I have no problem with this modification… in theory.  I think FOGO’s should be great lacrosse players in addition to great face off guys.  They can cradle, shoot, pass, etc.  I never understood why a guy would want to win the face off only to carry it down the field in the back of his stick and throw it at a guys feet. However, I’m not sure why this was a problem that required a rule.  As a coach I would prefer my guy use proper fundementals when handling the ball, but as a spectator it sure never bothered me.  I’m also not sure how this will be consistently enforced.  Can he pick it up and out in the back of his stick and then flip it out after a couple of steps? Three steps?  Not much in the way of explanation on this from Hind.  “Picking up and carrying the ball on the back of the stick is contrary to the intent of the faceoff,” Hind said. “Faceoffs continue to be an important part of the game, but the committee feels that some of the current tactics being used are contrary to the spirit of the rule.” Well at least we have him on record that faceoffs are an important part of the game.  I guess that’s good.  But seriously, what is the continued beef these guys have with the faceoff. They also recommended the 473rd edition of the slight tweak to the “protocol.” If the faceoff changes are approved, the protocol will also change slightly to the following process: 1 — The official will direct the players to come together and put their sticks on the ground opposite each other; 2 — The official will place the ball on the ground and say “set”; and 3 — The official will step away and blow the whistle to start play. Oh my gosh! What the heck difference does it make! Down, Set, Whistle.  Am I the only guy that thinks that “protocol” and “process” is simple enough.  Blow the daggum whistle, get the heck out of the way, and let’s play ball! Grown men sat around in a room, debated, took notes.  This is what they came out with. Recommendation 3 – Change the dead ball timeouts in which the restart will be in the field of play. In these instances, only the team in possession or entitled to possession is allowed to call timeout. In other words, the defensive team can’t call time out.  I would assume that the only dead ball situation where you could call a time out is after a goal is scored, before the face-off.  I like this rule.  If the offensive team catches the defensive team with wrong personnel on the field they can’t get a quick T/O when the ball goes out of bounds to change personnel.  So, that is cool.  Not sure about the overall impact on the game as a whole, but it’s not a bad idea. Buried down in the “other recommendations” is this little nugget.  “In plays around the crease, if a player releases the ball before landing in the crease, the goal shall count, provided his feet are grounded.” I was all excited until the last little bit…”provided his feet are grounded.” Bummer, the dive was soooo close to coming back.  Oh well.